[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] Polling the community [was - Re: The Relation Between Lo

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Peter P. Yim" <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 01:15:12 -0800
Message-id: <45FBB1A0.3040104@xxxxxxxx>
paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx wrote Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:32:48 +0700:
> ...[snip]...
> This thread is starting to become very alienating to all those who
> really are not interested in this discussion, ...[snip]...
> Peter:  I think we should start a polling tool and some user 
 > profiling for this group so we can determine whether this list
 > is just for mathematicians to impose their view of the world
 > onto others, or else indeed for people with different
 > backgrounds and levels of interests in  new technologies
> If it turns out the latter, then offensive' statements like the one
> below (and like the gorzonzola one earlier)  and any attempt to
> restrict the discourse to a single, partial point of view should be
> moderated rigorously in the future
> Best
> Paola Di Maio    (01)

[ppy]  To All, Ontolog is an "open" community. The 
[ontolog-forum] list is an un-moderated list. And, the only 
'articles of association' and 'by-law' we can go by is the 
Ontolog Charter (see: 
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nidB) and 
the Ontolog IPR Policy (see: 
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid32). What 
guides all of us (in this self-organizing virtual community 
setting) in the engagement is our own personal choice and integrity.    (02)

Both "formal ontology" and "informal ontology" discussions are 
relevant to the Ontolog community (see Charter). I personally 
learn a tremendous amount through these ongoing discourse, and 
have no objective reason to suggest they stop, especially when 
they are so relevant. Anyhow, we can all freely choose to 
participate or ignore a particular discussion thread (one should 
do the latter when it gets subjectively 'offensive').    (03)

We are, in fact, doing some sort of polling, for the purpose of 
the "Ontology Summit 2007" initiative[1], which I had just 
posted. It's not for the reason you suggested, Paola, but I trust 
this will be good for everyone. Therefore, rather than talking 
about what should go into the public discourse, may I suggest 
that we take a break (for a few minutes) and try to contribute to 
that survey in our own privacy instead.    (04)

Thanks & regards.  =ppy    (05)

P.S. [1] see: invitation to the "Ontology Summit 2007 Survey" at:     (06)

--    (07)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (08)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>